Bisschoff N O obo Denzil John Reyners v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (727/2022) [2023] ZASCA 160 (28 November 2023)

Bisschoff N O obo Denzil John Reyners v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (727/2022) [2023] ZASCA 160 (28 November 2023)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Mr Reyners had been under a disability or impediment since the incident, which prevented the interruption of the running of prescription as contemplated in the Prescription Act. The uncontested expert evidence established that Mr Reyners was incapable of managing his affairs and required the assistance of a curator ad litem from the time of the incident. The majority of the full court erred by disregarding this evidence and relying on inadmissible hearsay. Prescription only began to run from the date of appointment of the curator ad litem, not from the date of the incident. Accordingly, the appeal succeeded, and the order of the full court was set aside.

Citation
[2023] ZASCA 160
Parties
Appellant: Advocate C Bisschoff N O obo Denzil John Reyners; Respondent: Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 November 2023
Case Number
727/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs; order of the full court set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal with costs.
Judges
Mbatha, Mabindla-Boqwana, Matojane, Nhlangulela, Kathree-Setiloane
Legal Topics
Prescription Act, Extinctive Prescription, Curatorship, Mental Capacity, Special Plea, Interruption of Prescription
Civil Procedure Delict Prescription Act Extinctive Prescription Curatorship Mental Capacity Special Plea Interruption of Prescription

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Advocate C Bisschoff N O obo Denzil John Reyners

Appellant

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's claim against the respondent became time-barred three years after the incident or if the prescription period was extended due to mental incapacity.
  2. 2 Whether prescription commenced from the date of the incident or from the date of appointment of curator ad litem.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant had knowledge of the identity of the debtor and the facts from which the debt arose as required by the Prescription Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Mr Reyners had been under a disability or impediment since the incident, which prevented the interruption of the running of prescription as contemplated in the Prescription Act. The uncontested expert evidence established that Mr Reyners was incapable of managing his affairs and required the assistance of a curator ad litem from the time of the incident. The majority of the full court erred by disregarding this evidence and relying on inadmissible hearsay. Prescription only began to run from the date of appointment of the curator ad litem, not from the date of the incident. Accordingly, the appeal succeeded, and the order of the full court was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs; order of the full court set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the full court is set aside and replaced with the following: 'The appeal is dismissed with costs.'